Phx-Suns.Net

Political discussion here. Any reasonable opinion is welcome, but due to the sensitive nature of the topic area, please be nice and respectful to others. No flaming or trolling, please. And please keep political commentary out of the other board areas and confine it to this area. Thanks!

This is interesting, thanks Nodak. I do appreciate the stats listed, and they make it seem like, "Heck, the US shouldn't do anything, since it's hardly a blip on the radar in comparison to what it's been like before.". Maybe that's true, maybe no action should be taken. Who is negatively affected by the illegal immigration? I can't say that I am that I know of. The crisis is the humanitarian treatment of the people involved.

Is there a big difference in the "fence" proposed and the "wall" proposed?

I really don't want to stick up for Trump, as I think he says a lot of stupid things that I don't agree with. With that said, I don't think Trump said that ALL illegal immigrants are drug dealers and rapists, but I respect the total commitment to that narrative. We all have or probably know good personal friends that happen to be illegal immigrants, and we know that's not even close to being true in any way. Trump tends to over-exaggerate most of the time, and taking it a literal fact to be fact checked seems a bit dishonest to me. He's like a 6 yr old trying to tell a story, "He was like 15 ft tall I am sure." I know I do the same thing many times and I think many of us do the same thing from time to time.

I have no doubt that people are trying to risk life and limb to escape to a better life in the US. Fixing or intervening heavily in what is wrong in their country seems heavy handed, but a semi-impossible long-term solution would be to make it better where they live. I also have no doubt that even they would prefer that their own country was better, safer and more prosperous, but how do you do that?

I can't say that legalizing marijuana has slowed it, but I can't say it didn't either. It sounds good though. I would rather it be out in the open than in the shadows helping the coffers of the cartel.

Trump tends to over-exaggerate most of the time, and taking it a literal fact to be fact checked seems a bit dishonest to me. He's like a 6 yr old trying to tell a story, "He was like 15 ft tall I am sure."

It's a little dishonest to to expect the POTUS to be direct and honest as much as possible, but it's fine if we equate his behavior to that of a 6-year old?

Trump tends to over-exaggerate most of the time, and taking it a literal fact to be fact checked seems a bit dishonest to me. He's like a 6 yr old trying to tell a story, "He was like 15 ft tall I am sure."

It's a little dishonest to to expect the POTUS to be direct and honest as much as possible, but it's fine if we equate his behavior to that of a 6-year old?

Is there a big difference in the "fence" proposed and the "wall" proposed?

I don't think so. The goal is the same. We are Democrats and Republicans so we have to fight about it. Trump said a big beautiful cement wall and kind of boxed himself into a corner. A fence won't do politically. Then again he said Mexico would pay for it and that isn't going to happen and he's still standing. He could just say he met with all the experts and they agreed that a fence in some parts would be just as effective as a wall and save Americans lots of money and that might appease his base and he could claim victory, which is what I think really matters to him anyway. They will believe anything he says so, if he sells it they will buy it.

What to do to help Mexico and other countries in that neck of the woods prosper? They already make a lot of products in Mexico, Colgate toothpaste, Bose, Lear jets, tires, Fender guitars, cars and trucks, beer, tequila.

What are the biggest problems facing Mexico?https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-bigg ... ing-MexicoCorruption- Not only high-level corruption, but it has penetrated in all spheres of society, from the presidency to the local cops that ask for a few bucks to let you go for speeding. There’s been scandal after scandal this last years, some would say that because of increased transparency others that it has increased exponentially, who the hell knows and I think it’s besides the point. States have become nothing but a piggy bank for governors, conflicts of interests, mayors who pride themselves of only “stealing a little bit”.

The truth is that corruption has became normalized and that no one is proposing serious solutions, from the left to the right to the establishment to the anti-establishment.

(I see that corruption happening in America too. Lobbying = corruption. We need to address in the US before it gets any more out of hand.)

Education- I’ll say it, Mexican education sucks, I’m not a fan of the current President but I do think his reform is a right step forward.

Public schools in rural zones that don’t have classes and teachers only cash their salaries, the system is stuck in the XX century rather than preparing children to be competitive in a globalized world.

Universities tend to be ranked pretty low, except perhaps for UNAM and ITESM.

Violence- While I do agree that the current strategy isn’t a coherent one, there’s not a lot Mexico could do different, as long as America both keeps consuming drugs while opposing reform, Mexico has no alternative but to fight the cartels. A lot of Mexicans would say “f*** america, legalize drugs and end this stupid war”, the problem is that cartels wouldn’t go away, their business is America they’ll keep fighting inside Mexico. So there really isn’t an alternative for Mexico than to fight along America, there’s even less hope considering the hawks in DC that took power this year who have an 80s mentality.

Contrary to popular opinion, Mexico has taken steps to end the war, Mexico has decriminalized possession of most drugs and focused on rehabilitation, but Mexico is dragged to it without choice.

You could argue economic growth would reduce it, which is true, except the amount of money to be made is too much and there will always be people who will join in; as well, such a growth creates a higher market for drugs as people have more income to spend (as we’ve seen in recent years).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_in_MexicoCorruption in Mexico has permeated several segments of society – political, economic, and social – and has greatly affected the country's legitimacy, transparency, accountability, and effectiveness.[1] Many of these dimensions have evolved as a product of Mexico's legacy of elite, oligarchic consolidation of power and authoritarian rule.[1]

Transparency International's 2017 Corruption Perceptions Index ranks the country 135th place out of 180 countries.[2

So it seems corruption is the biggest problem in Mexico and it goes from the top down. Nobody is going to do anything about it because those benefitting from the corruption are the ones in charge of stopping it. That also reminds me of the corruption in America. Politicians are not going to stop the lobbying corruption because they are the ones benefitting from it. It would take millions marching on Washington demanding change to make any difference. Maybe the same in Mexico except I fear those people would be crushed by law enforcement who is also on the take.

So the short answer is, we aren't going to stop corruption in Mexico or the US and we aren't going to be able to stop everybody from crossing the border illegally, wall or not. It is what it is. We have other more pressing issues we need to get to where maybe we can actually make a difference.

At the core of H.R. 1 is a set of far-reaching election reforms that have the potential to expand voter access, reshape how campaigns are financed and overhaul how congressional districts are drawn.

One key provision would establish an automatic voter registration system. Another would prohibit states from denying convicted felons who have served out their sentences the right to vote. A different provision would make Election Day a federal holiday in a bid to boost voter turnout.

One provision, for example, would require presidential and vice presidential candidates to release 10 years of personal tax returns.

In addition to expanding ballot access nationwide, the bill looks to curtail partisan gerrymandering, the drawing of congressional districts to benefit one political party over another, by ordering states to create independent redistricting commissions.

The legislation would also require 501(c)(4) nonprofit entities engaged in political activity — dubbed “dark money” groups — to disclose their large-dollar donors, a move lauded by political transparency advocates but criticized by other groups, who warn that the requirement could chill free speech.

H.R. 1 represents the centerpiece of Democrats' efforts to make good on a campaign pledge to combat corruption in Washington and take on what they have alleged is a long-running effort by Republicans to suppress voter turnout and muddy the waters of campaign finance.

The measure is virtually dead on arrival in the Senate

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has railed against the measure as a “power grab” by Democrats, arguing that it would tweak election laws and procedures in such a way that would benefit the party’s candidates.

“They’re trying to clothe this power grab with cliches about ‘restoring democracy’ and doing it ‘For the People,’ but their proposal is simply a naked attempt to change the rules of American politics to benefit one party. It should be called the Democrat Politician Protection Act,” McConnell wrote in an op-ed published by The Washington Post in January.

He’s already vowed not to allow H.R. 1 to come to a vote in the Senate. Even if it did, the measure would likely face an insurmountable challenge before the chamber’s Republican majority.

Waiting at the end of the tunnel for H.R. 1: a presidential veto. The White House has already warned that President Trump will reject the legislation in the event that it reaches his desk.

What do you guys think? It obviously is going nowhere in the Senate and the WH. It is similar to Republicans voting 50 times to repeal Obamacare knowing full well that it wasn't going anywhere. It's a political statement intended for Americans. Democrats are trying to say "We want more people to be able to vote, we want to stop corruption in the voting process and the Republicans want to stop us because they want gerrymandering to continue, less people voting, dark money flowing and the Presidents taxes hidden."

Republicans are trying to say "It's just a plain old fashioned power grab by Democrats."

Me personally am against any Gerrymandering by any party. Would be OK with a national holiday on election day. Combine it with another holiday if one more holiday in a year is so bad. Columbus didn't discover America. Why should we have a fake holiday that is based on a lie? Screw Columbus. He was a horrible slave trading, thief who was into genocide. He makes Trump look like a Saint. We don't need to celebrate this horrible person. I am OK with Presidents disclosing their tax returns. You want to run America? You need to be squeaky clean IMO.

Crossings are up lately. You would think with all the press and scare tactics of detaining everybody and separating kids from their parents that crossings would be down. Desperate people trying to escape death in their country are wiling to risk it. Even with the levels where they are now they are still way below 2000 levels. The Border Patrol budget in 2000 was 1.1 Billion. Today it’s 4.3 Billion. We have almost twice as many Border Patrol agents now than we had in 2000.

Border crossings have declined to near-record low levels in recent years. The number of apprehensions along the Southwest border between ports of entry was fewer than 304,000 in FY 2017, the lowest number since FY 1971, almost fifty years ago. This represented a decline of approximately 25 percent from FY 2016 levels (409,000 border apprehensions) and a decline of more than 80 percent from the record-high levels of FY 2000 (1.6 million border apprehensions).

There has been an increase in border crossings and apprehensions in FY 2018 and in the first five months of FY 2019, but the number of people attempting to enter the U.S. is still far below the all-time high levels of the early 2000s. The Border Patrol apprehended an estimated 397,000 people in FY 2018, a 31 percent increase from FY 2017 levels (304,000 apprehensions) and a decline of 75 percent from FY 2000 levels (1.6 million apprehensions). In the first five months of FY 2019, the Border Patrol apprehended 268,000 people, a 95 percent increase over the same period in FY 2018 (137,000 apprehensions) and a 43 percent increase over the same period in FY 2017 (187,000 apprehensions). That said, the number of people attempting to enter the U.S. in FY 2019 is still consistent with the lower levels of the mid-to-late-2010s.

The data above suggests that the threat of separating parents and children is unlikely to deter a parent whose children’s lives are at risk. Families facing threats of violence or murder from gangs, drug cartels, and transnational criminal organizations may do whatever it takes to flee to safety.

Despite an overall decrease in the number of migrants crossing the Southwest border since the all-time high levels of the early 2000s – mostly as a result of the decrease in the number of Mexican migrants coming to the U.S. – families and children seeking asylum from the three neighboring Northern Triangle countries of Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador continue to arrive at the U.S. border. Those countries consistently rank among the most violent countries in the world, possessing the world’s highest murder rates. The administration’s new policies aimed at deterring these families are bound to fail, given the immense danger these families face by remaining in their home countries

The most recent data available also shows each Border Patrol agent along the Southwest border apprehended on average about 3 migrants in the first five months of FY 2019, an increase above FY 2018 (approximately 2 migrants per month), but far below FY 2000 levels (approximately 16 migrants per month), when a much smaller Border Patrol faced a much larger number of border crossers.

How much does each Border Patrol apprehension cost?

Approximately $10,800 per apprehension. With the significant increase in Border Patrol personnel and a large decrease in unlawful border crossings over the past two decades, the average annual number of apprehensions made by each Border Patrol agent dropped from 182 in FY 2000 to only 24 in FY 2018. At the same time, the Border Patrol’s budget increased from about $1.1 billion in FY 2000 to $3.8 billion in FY 2017 and to nearly $4.3 billion in FY 2018, a record-level of funding.

As the number of people crossing the border has declined, the amount spent by the Border Patrol per apprehension at the nation’s borders has increased considerably. While U.S. taxpayers spent an average of $656 per Border Patrol apprehension in FY 2000, that number rose to $10,831 in FY 2018 – an increase of about 1,650 percent. The marginal cost of an additional border apprehension has skyrocketed, even as the overall trend of unlawful crossings has gone down, suggesting that a shift in border security policies could yield significant savings to taxpayers.

Trump is now proposing to charge a fee for charging for asylum. This would be an outlier among developed countries. Most people who apply for asylum cannot afford such a fee. Trump also wants to make asylum seekers ineligible for employment once they get here.

Trump is now proposing to charge a fee for charging for asylum. This would be an outlier among developed countries. Most people who apply for asylum cannot afford such a fee. Trump also wants to make asylum seekers ineligible for employment once they get here.

Clear catch-22 set up by the admin to punish people seeking asylum. You need to pay, but you can't work. And the countries people are fleeing due to risk of life are not ones with even 2nd world levels of wealth. So only people that don't need to work (independently wealthy) can now apply for asylum. Great.